J. Great Lakes Res.

32:7790
Internat. Assoc. Great Lakes Res., 2006

The Water Balance and Stable Isotope Hydrology of

Lake Edward, Uganda-Congo
James M. Russell1,* and Thomas C. Johnson2
1Department

of Geological Sciences
Brown University
Box 1846
Providence, Rhode Island 02912
2Large

Lakes Observatory
University of Minnesota Duluth
10 University Drive, RLB
Duluth, Minnesota 55812
ABSTRACT. Lake Edward, Uganda-Congo, is one of the least studied of the great lakes of East Africa,
and little is known of its physical hydrology. Stable isotope data and modeling and previously published
estimates of Lake Edwards water balance are used to constrain the physical hydrology of the lake, and
particularly the relative proportion of surface outflow to evaporative water losses. Stable isotope calculations suggest that Lake Edward loses roughly 50% of its water income by evaporation, while reviews of
published hydrologic data together with our calculations suggest that evaporation comprises 54% of
water losses. The similarity of these two sets of calculations lends credence to their validity, and provides
a new water budget for the lake. Our results have important implications for the chemistry and hydroclimatic sensitivity of Lake Edward.
INDEX WORDS:

Lake Edward, East Africa, rift lake, stable isotope, hydrology.

INTRODUCTION
The Great Lakes of East Africa are rich sources
of information about past variations of the African
monsoons. The potential for these lakes to record
past variations in monsoon intensity is partly due to
their hydrologic sensitivity that is driven by hydrologic budgets for the lakes in which water losses are
dominated by evaporation (Spigel and Coulter
1996). Lake Edward, located on the equator at the
border between Uganda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, has received perhaps the least attention of the East African Great Lakes, despite
paleoclimatic studies that have revealed a rich and
varied paleoclimatic history for the lake (e.g., Russell et al. 2003, Laerdal et al. 2002). A thorough
understanding of the modern hydrology of Lake Edward is critical to interpreting paleoclimate data
using Lake Edwards sedimentary record; however,
estimates of Lake Edwards hydrologic budget are
few and often contradictory (Lehman 2002).
*Corresponding

This paper seeks to refine calculations of the

modern hydrologic balance of Lake Edward using
past measurements and stable isotope data. First,
we summarize previous estimates and measurements of Lake Edwards hydrology. We then present new stable isotopic data for the lake and
watershed that help to constrain the water balance
of the lake. Our data and literature review suggest
that evaporation and outflow each account for
roughly 50% of water loss from Lake Edward, estimates that are similar to some previous studies and
help us to better understand the lakes physical and
chemical structure.
Background:
Regional Geology and Hydrology
Lake Edward (0040S, 29 2029 50E, 912
m a.s.l.) is situated in a Cenozoic half-graben in the
Western Arm of the East African Rift Valley (Fig.
1). The lake is presently open, draining northward
to Lake Albert via the Semliki River. Lake Edward

author. E-mail: James_Russell@brown.edu

77

78

Russell and Johnson

FIG. 1. Map of the East African Great Lakes region. Dashed lines in the left-hand figure
indicate the position of the eastern and western arms of the rift. Shaded gray regions indicate
major water bodies. A close-up at right of the equatorial lakes region shows political boundaries (dashed lines) bisecting Lake Edward.
is bounded by the Lubero border fault to the west
and the Kigezi highlands to the east, the Ruwenzori
mountains to the north, and the Virunga volcanoes
to the south (Fig. 2). These four regions, together
with the Lake George catchment to the northeast,
comprise five major catchment areas that provide
runoff to Lake Edward.
Lake George is drained by the Kazinga Channel,
which flows sluggishly for 60 km to Lake Edward.
The Ruwenzori Mountains to the north of Lake Edward rise from the rift floor to heights of over 5,000
m and are currently glaciated. Principal inflows
from the Ruwenzoris to Lake Edward are from the
Nyamugasani and Lubilia rivers (Fig. 2), while considerable additional inflow from the Ruwenzoris is
delivered to Lake Edward via Lake George. Mountains to the west of Lake Edward along the Lubero
border fault rise steeply from the lake to heights of
2,500 to 3,000 meters within 15 km of the lake
shore, and are drained by numerous short, steep
rivers. The Kigezi highlands to the east rise more
gently to form a low divide between Lakes Edward
and Victoria. Principal inflows from the Kigezi
highlands to Lake Edward are from the Ishasha,
Ntungwe, Nchwera, and Nyamweru rivers. The
Virunga volcanoes to the south divide Lakes Edward and Kivu and are very important to the hydrology and chemistry of Lake Edward (Kilham
and Hecky 1973, Lehman 2002). Principal inflows

to Lake Edward from the Virunga region are the

Lula, Rwindi, and Ruchuru rivers.
Lake Edward: Bathymetry, Morphology,
Limnology, and Climatology
Lake Edward has a surface area of 2,325 km2 and
maximum depth of 117 meters, located within 5 km
of the western shore (Fig. 3; Lehman 2002). Lake
Edward has an oxycline commonly found at about
40 m depth and is thought to be oligomictic (Beadle
1981, Hecky and Degens 1973). Although stratified, the temperature difference between surface
and deep waters is only about 1C, with an average
annual surface temperature of about 26.5C (Verbeke 1957, Beadle 1966). Chemically, Lake Edward
is a Na-Mg-HCO3 system with a salinity of approximately 0.8 g/L and a pH averaging 8.9 (Talling and
Talling 1965).
Rainfall in the Lake Edward region falls in two
rainy seasons coinciding with the passing of the Intertropical Convergence Zone, from October to December and March to May (Viner and Smith 1973,
Nicholson 1996). Rainfall in the region, and
throughout East Africa, varies strongly with altitude
(Viner and Smith 1973, Nicholson 1996). Thus, the
highlands surrounding Lake Edward receive considerably more rainfall than the lake itself, which experiences a more arid climate than much of the
region (Hurst 1927, Viner and Smith 1973).

The Hydrology of Lake Edward, Uganda

79

FIG. 2. Map of the Lake Edward region showing catchment areas, major rivers, high
elevation areas, swamps, and water sampling sites.
Previous Work and Data Sources
The first estimates of the hydrologic budget of
Lake Edward were made by Hurst (1925, 1927) as
part of a survey of the Nile River headwaters.
Hursts work contains single-sample river gauge
data and runoff estimates for several rivers in Lake
Edwards catchment as well as Lake Edwards outflow. Viner and Smith (1973) provided a hydrologic

budget for Lake George based upon 5 years of detailed hydrologic and climatic monitoring. Their
data include daily to monthly river gauge data, the
only such data available for the Edward basin. Data
from these authors, supplemented by other estimates of Lake Edwards hydrologic and limnologic
characteristics (Worthington 1932, Damas 1937,
Verbeke 1957, Hydromet 1982) form the basis for

80

Russell and Johnson

TABLE 1. Morphometric and Catchment information for Lakes Edward and George, UgandaCongo.
Lake Edward
Surface Elevation
Surface area
Volume
Max Depth
Catchment Area (less lake)
Ruwenzori Catchment Area
Western Escarpment Area
Eastern Rivers
Southern Rivers
(including Ishasha)

FIG. 3. Bathymetric Map of Lake Edward, with

depth contours in meters. The position of crater
lakes within the basin are also shown.

our study. Lehman (2002) combined hydroclimatic

data with his own hydrologic calculations and an
energy balance model into the first physical, hydrologic, and chemical model of Lake Edward.
Lehmans calculations suggest Lake Edwards outflow exceeds annual water losses by evaporation by
a factor of nearly five, an estimate that differs considerably from previous researchers.
Bathymetric and morphometric measurements for
Lake Edward were calculated by Laerdal (2000)
and Lehman (2002) (Table 1). Catchment areas for
Lakes Edward and George were measured from Defense Mapping Association maps L-4, L-5, and M-5
(Fig. 2). Our estimate for the catchment area of
Lakes Edward and George differs slightly from previous studies (Lehman 2002). Based upon the DMA
maps, it appears that Lehman (2002) underestimated the catchments of the Ntungwe and
Rusangwe rivers by about 90% and 116%, respectively. We are uncertain as to why these discrepancies exist, but we note that our revised catchment
for the Rusangwe River matches that of Viner and
Smith (1973), who explored the area extensively.
Our revised catchment area increases the proportion
of low-elevation areas to the east that drain into
Lakes Edward and George, which could affect surface runoff into the lake.
The isotopic composition of Lake Edward, inflowing rivers and springs, and occasional rainfall
samples were sampled and analyzed between 1996
and 2003. 20-mL samples from rivers were taken at

Lake George
Surface area
Catchment

912 m a.s.l.
2,325 km2
767 108 m3
117 m
15,840 km2
1,231 km2
1,136 km2
5,680 km2
7,793 km2

250 km2
9,976 km2

road crossings within 15 km of Lake Edwards

shore, and lake waters were sampled from open
water at least 5 km from shore. Water samples were
collected and stored in high-density polyethylene
vials prior to analysis. Analyses were conducted on
a Finnegan Delta S mass spectrometer at the University of Arizona; results are expressed in delta
notation with respect to the SMOW standard. Analytical error was 0.1 for 18O and 1.0 for D.
The Hydrology and Water Balance
of Lake Edward
The fundamental equation for the hydrology of
Lake Edward assumes the lake is in a steady state
with respect to its volume:
Evaporation + Outflow =
Direct precipitation + Catchment inputs

(1)

Previous estimates of the magnitudes of each of

these terms will be discussed below.
Direct Precipitation
Hulme (1998) estimates precipitation in the Lake
Edward region at 1.217 m/yr, similar to the estimates of Lehman (2002) of 1.214 m/yr, as well as
the 1.1 m/yr estimated by Hurst (1927). However,
the highland regions surrounding Lake Edward receive far more rainfall than the lowlands and the
lake itself (Viner and Smith 1973). The estimates
above are based upon weighted averages of rainfall
stations in all of southwestern Uganda, including

The Hydrology of Lake Edward, Uganda

81

TABLE 2. River inputs to Lakes Edward and George from Hurst (1927), Viner and Smith
(1973), and Lehman (2002).
River
Ruchuru, dry season
Ishasha, dry season
Ntungwe, dry season
Nyamugasani
Sebwe (George catchment)
Rukoki/Kamulikwezi (George)
Mubuku (George)
Ruimi (George)
Mpanga (George)
Kyambura (Kazinga Channel inflow)
George basin (Viner and Smith, 1973)
Edward basin, Lehman (2002)
Edward basin, Hurst (1927)

River Flow
(m3/sec)
40.000
8.000
7.000
8.330
2.040
4.100
12.500
6.000
11.500
9.500
61.800
280.000
141.000

several stations in the highlands surrounding Lake

Edward, and therefore probably overestimate direct
precipitation to the lakes surface (Nicholson 1996).
Viner and Smith estimate direct precipitation onto
the surface of Lake George averages 0.82 m/yr.
Rainfall stations nearest to the surface elevation of
Lake Edward, Kasese and Kabale, receive 0.87 and
0.99 m/yr, respectively (National Climate Data
Center archive). We have averaged these three values and estimate that direct precipitation to Lake
Edward is 0.9 m/yr.
Catchment Inputs
Catchment inputs include river inputs, surface
runoff, and groundwater inputs. Groundwater, although it may be important to the chemical balance
of Lake Edward, is assumed to be negligible in the
hydrologic budget (Lehman 2002). Catchment inputs comprise the largest source of water to Lake
Edward (Lehman 2002), yet they are by far the
most difficult to estimate due to a nearly complete
lack of river gauge data from the Lake Edward
basin.
The available catchment-normalized surface
runoff data from Lake George demonstrate the heterogeneity of the regions hydrology (Table 2;
Viner and Smith 1973). All of the rivers draining
into Lake George measured by Viner and Smith
(1973), except the Mpanga and Kyambura, drain
the Ruwenzori Mountains and have very high surface runoff rates, ranging from 0.514 to 1.54 m/yr.
However, when the less steep, low-elevation east-

Catchment
(km2)

Runoff
(m/yr)

Annual Input
(10 9 m 3 /yr)

507
83
183
256
266
4,670
660

0.514
0.777
0.707
1.540
0.711
0.080
0.450

0.260
0.060
0.129
0.394
0.660
0.374
0.297

9,976
15,840
15,840

0.196
0.514
0.280

1.948
8.850
4.435

ern part of Lake Georges drainage basin is taken

into account, the average runoff for the entire
George basin is only about 0.2 m/yr. This is likely
due to the steeper elevation gradients of the Ruwenzoris, which yield higher runoff, as well as higher
average annual rainfall at higher elevations within
the lakes catchments.
The only river that flows into Lake Edward that
has annual gauge data is the Nyamugasani River,
which drains the Ruwenzori Mountains (Viner and
Smith 1973). Lehman (2002) applied the runoff derived from the Nyamugasani catchment, 0.514
m/yr, to the entire Lake Edward basin, and calculated inputs to the lake totaling 8.85 109 m3/yr.
Based on the example of Lake George it seems
likely that this is an overestimate, given that the
slope, climate, and bedrock geology of the Ruwenzori mountains is prone to high runoff as compared
to the Lake Edward catchment as a whole. In point
of fact, the slope of the Nyamugasani River is about
6% over the rivers catchment, while the average
slope of the rivers draining into Lake Edward from
the east is only 1.5%. The average slope of rivers
draining into Lake Edward from the south is 3%,
while rivers draining from the west have slopes
equal to, or higher than, the Nyamugasani River. If
we assume that rivers draining from the Ruwenzoris and the western mountains into Lake Edward
have surface-area normalized runoff yields equal to
the Nyamugasani River, that rivers draining the
eastern slope provide runoff equal to that of the
Mpanga River, and that the southern rivers provide
runoff intermediate between these two areas, we

82

Russell and Johnson

TABLE 3. Evaporation Estimates for Lakes Edward and George, from
Hurst (1927), Viner and Smith (1973), Lehman (2002), and Penman and
energy balance calculations of this study.
Author
Lehman (2002)
Hurst (1927)
Viner and Smith (1973)
This Study
This Study

Annual
Method
Rate, m/yr
Mass Transfer
1.16
comparison to Lake Victoria
1.20
Penman
1.83
Energy Balance
1.98
Penman
2.10

calculate an average runoff for the Edward catchment of 0.25 m/yr, very similar to the value of 0.28
suggested by Hurst (1927). Hursts value is intermediate between that of Lehman (2002) for Lake
Edward and Viner and Smith (1973) for Lake
George, and seems reasonable given that the Lake
Edward catchment contains a slightly higher proportion of steeply sloping terrain than the Lake
George catchment. Therefore, we assign a runoff
value equivalent of Hursts estimate of 0.28 m/yr,
or 4.435 109 m3/yr, to catchment inputs to Lake
Edward excluding inputs from Lake George.
In addition to general catchment inputs, the
Kazinga Channel delivers 1.70 109 m3/yr to Lake
Edward (Viner and Smith 1973), a value determined at its exit from Lake George both by hydrologic modeling and gauge data. This represents the
combined inputs of rivers and precipitation to Lake
George, less evaporation from Lake Georges surface (Viner and Smith 1973).

TABLE 4.

Month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec

Water Loss,
km3/yr
2.59
2.79
4.24
4.60
4.87

Outputs
Surface Evaporation
Published estimates for evaporation from Lake
Edward vary widely (Table 3). The most common
methods of estimating evaporation from a lake surface are energy balance and Penmans (1948)
method. The latter combines a formula for potential
evapotranspiration with energy balance and watermass transfer. Both methods require numerous
input variables, including air vapor pressure, lake
temperature, cloudiness, and surface radiation.
Input data for evaporation calculations includes
surface pressure, dew point, cloud fraction, and
wind-speed data from the Kasese weather station
(Table 4), which lies between Lakes Edward and
George. Lake water temperature is derived from
mean monthly measurements reported in Verbeke
(1957), which are slightly cooler than more recent
values reported from Lehman (2002). Insolation

Meteorological input data used in evaporation calculations.

Top of
Atmosphere
Insolation
W/m2
416.2
431.8
438.2
427.1
406.2
392.5
397.0
414.7
429.8
430.3
418.2
409.0

Surface
pressure
mb
903.6
903.5
903.4
904.7
905.7
904.9
905.6
905.1
905.1
904.3
903.8
904.3

Surface
Air Temp
C
23.36
23.58
23.63
23.68
23.57
23.24
22.81
22.83
22.73
22.88
23.01
23.26

Dew
Point
C
19.01
17.81
19.02
19.73
19.66
19.00
18.15
17.44
18.72
19.13
19.40
19.15

Cloud
Fraction
0.413
0.305
0.481
0.333
0.257
0.292
0.318
0.494
0.353
0.370
0.517
0.420

Temp
Lake
C
25.9
26.0
26.1
26.5
27.1
27.2
25.8
25.3
25.8
26.8
27.2
26.5

Wind-speed
m/s
2.41
2.14
2.48
2.14
2.00
1.65
1.66
2.22
2.68
2.67
2.33
2.33

The Hydrology of Lake Edward, Uganda

83

and surface air temperature were obtained from the

National Center for Environmental Prediction
(NCEP) Electronic Reanalysis Atlas. Kasese data
for windspeed, surface pressure, and average air
temperature were checked against NCEP data, and
little difference was observed.

form of the equation discussed in Jensen (1974)

that has windspeed coefficients modified for use in
large lakes:

Energy Balance
The energy balance method for estimating evaporation assumes that heat inputs from net radiation
are balanced by latent heat loss and sensible heat
transfer. Equations for our energy balance calculations are discussed extensively in Yin and Nicholson (1998) and will not be repeated here. Briefly,
top of atmosphere solar radiation calculated for 0
latitude is modified by cloud cover and lake albedo
before entering the lake as incoming radiation. The
net longwave flux from the lake is determined as a
function of lake temperature, humidity, cloud cover,
and water emissivity. The difference between these
two terms is the net radiation income to the lake.
Calculated radiation income in Lake Edward varies
from 140 to 190 W/m2.
The ratio of the energy loss from conduction to
that from evaporation is referred to as the Bowen
ratio, which compares humidity differences in air
with a saturated lake surface:

where s is a parameter determined from the slope of

the saturated vapor pressure-temperature curve at
the mean air temperature, is the psychrometric
constant, Qn is net solar radiation, Qx is change in
heat stored in the water body, U is windspeed at 2
m height above the water body, e 0 is saturated
vapor pressure, ea is the measured vapor pressure at
air temperature and humidity, and L is the latent
heat of vaporization.
Both Penman and energy-balance derived evaporation estimates exceed previous estimates of evaporation rates from Lake Edward (Table 5) (Hurst
1927, Lehman 2002). Hursts estimate is based
upon extrapolation of evaporation estimates from
Lake Victoria to Lake Edward; however, subsequent estimates have shown that evaporation rates
for Lake Victoria exceed Hursts estimate by at
least 30% (Yin and Nicholson 1998). Lehman
(2002) estimated evaporation using mass transfer
calculations, and used diel temperature variations
for Lake Edward calculated from his physical
model of the lake. While this approach should yield
better estimates of evaporation than our calculations above, the diurnal temperature fluctuations of
Lake Edward are not known. Moreover, evapora-

B = (Ca*(TL Ta))/(L*(e0 ea))

(2)

where Ca is the specific heat of dry air, TL is the

lake surface temperature, Ta is surface air temperature, L is the latent heat of vaporization, e0 is the
saturation vapor pressure, and ea is the measured air
vapor pressure. Monthly Bowen ratio values for
Lake Edward vary between 0.1 and 0.16. Solution
of the Bowen ratio allows for the calculation of
evaporation by converting latent heat loss to evaporated water using the latent heat of evaporation at
measured lake temperatures.
Values calculated for monthly evaporation vary
from 0.131 to 0.191 m/month (Table 5). Our estimate of annual evaporation exceeds previous estimates for Lake Edward, but is similar to Penman
and water-balance-based estimates for Lake George
(Viner and Smith 1973).
Penman Evaporation
The Penman (1948) approach has been used in
numerous studies (Winter et al. 1995, Turner et al.
1996, Yin and Nicholson 1998). Here we rely on a

Evap = {(s/(s + ))*(Qn Qx) + (/( + s))

[(15.36*(0.5 + 0.01U))*(e0 ea)]} / L

(3)

TABLE 5. Monthly evaporation estimates for

Lake Edward calculated from using both Penman
and energy balance methods.

Month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual

Penman,
m/month
0.1695
0.1836
0.1788
0.1718
0.1886
0.1726
0.1496
0.1642
0.1865
0.2004
0.1921
0.1796
2.1373

Energy
Balance,
m/month
0.1609
0.1795
0.1564
0.1812
0.1913
0.1701
0.1689
0.1380
0.1727
0.1770
0.1313
0.1555
1.9828

84

Russell and Johnson

tion calculations using mass transfer equations are

problematic when shore-based climatic data are
used (Winter et al. 1995). Penman and energy balance formulations are less problematic in this regard due to the prominence of the radiation terms in
those equations.
Monthly Penman estimates for evaporation rates
exceed most previously published values (Table 5),
but are again in rough agreement with both our energy budget calculation and Penman estimates for
Lake George (Viner and Smith 1973). Due to the
potential problems with Penman-based estimation
of evaporation (Winter et al. 1995, Nicholson and
Yin 1998) the energy-budget derived estimate is
used in water balance calculations below.
Outflow
The final term in our hydrologic budget for Lake
Edward is outflow via the Semliki River. Annualized discharge estimates for the Semliki vary
widely (Table 6), ranging from 3.3 10 9 m 3 /yr
(Worthington 1932) to 10.8 109 m3/yr (Lehman
2002). Comprehensive surveys of the Semliki River
were made by the World Meteorological Organizations Hydromet survey program at the Semlikis
entrance to Lake Albert (Said 1993, Hydromet
1982). Between the two lakes, the Semliki drains
roughly an area of about 7,000 km2, including the
extremely wet western side of the Ruwenzori
Mountains. Thus, although Hydromet measurements cannot directly tell us of the Semlikis disTABLE 6.
left.

charge from Lake Edward, they do provide upper

limits for the amount of water that exits Lake Edward assuming that water losses by evaporation
from the Semliki River are at least balanced by
water inputs from the catchment between the two
lakes.
Assuming that our hydrologic estimates for direct
precipitation, river inflows, and evaporation are
correct, solution of equation 1 provides an estimate
of Semliki River discharge of 3.9 109 m3/yr, similar to those of Hurst (1927) and Worthington
(1932). If the additional drainage received from the
Semliki catchment (assuming inputs of 0.3 m/m2/yr,
similar to the Edward catchment, from 7,000 km2),
is subtracted from Hydromet (1982) gauge measurements, the Semliki discharge from Lake Edward is about 3.7 109 m3/yr, very similar to our
estimate of 3.9 109 m3/yr based upon Lake Edwards water balance.
Stable Isotope Hydrology of Lake Edward
Numerous authors have used stable isotopic and
hydrologic measurements of lakes to constrain lesseasily measured components of lakes hydrologic
budgets (see Gat 1995). Although a lack of comprehensive data for the Edward catchment precludes a
detailed discussion of the lakes isotope hydrology,
stable isotope data nevertheless provide important
constraints on Lake Edwards water budget.
Assuming groundwater is a negligible hydrologic

Estimates of the annual rate of Semliki outflow. Sources are given at

Author
William Garstain,
reported in
Hurst, 1927
Hurst, 1925
Hurst, 1925
Hurst, 1927
Worthington, 1932
Damas, 1937
Hydromet, 1982,
reported in Said, 1993
Hydromet, 1982
reported in Said, 1993
Lehman, 2002

Flow Rate
(m3/sec)

Annualized flow
(109 m3/yr)

L. Edward, dry season, 1903

L. Albert, Mar 1924
L. Albert, Apr 1923
L. Edward, estimated
L. Edward, dry season, 1930
L. Edward

97
175
90
NA
104
65

NA
NA
NA
5.0
3.3
NA

L. Albert, measured 195660

NA

3.8

L. Albert, measured 196270

L. Edward

NA
NA

5.9
10.8

Site and Date

The Hydrology of Lake Edward, Uganda

85

TABLE 7. Results of stable isotopic analysis ( 18O, D) of lakes, rivers, and springs
from the Lake Edward catchment sampled in 19962003.
Sample
Lake Edward surface (5 m depth)
Lake Edward hypolimnion (45 m depth)
Lake Edward surface (1 m depth)
Lake Edward surface (1 m depth)
Lake George surface (0.5 m depth)
Lake George surface (0.5 m depth)
Kazinga Channel
Kazinga Channel

Date
May-96
May-96
Jan-01
Jan-02
Jan-02
May-03
Jan-01
May-03

Nyamugasani River, East tributary

Nyamugasani River, West Tributary
Lubilia River
Bwera River (Lubilia Tributary)
Mubuku River (Lake George inflow)
Nyamweru River
Nyamweru River
Ishasha River
Ishasha River
Ntungwe River
Ntungwe River
Nchwera River
Nchwera River
Maramagambo forest spring, Blue Pool
Maramagambo forest unnamed spring
Rain, Ft. Portal
Rain, Ft. Portal
Rain, Ft. Portal
Rain, Ft. Portal

Jan-02
Jan-02
Jan-02
Jan-02
May-03
Jan-02
May-03
Jan-02
May-03
Jan-02
May-03
Jan-02
May-03
Jun-03
Jul-03
4 Jan 2002
1 Jan 2002
29 Dec 2001
17 May 2003

18O, SMOW
4.3
4.5
4.2
4.2
1
1.0
0.6
0.3

D,SMOW
29
31
29
30
14
10
11
8

2.7
2.2
2
1.4
4.4
1
2.8
1.7
2.9
1.1
2.7
1.1
2.4
2.1
2.2
2.2
2.1
1.6
3.1

4
1
0
2
16
5
7
1
9
3
8
3
6
2
3
33
28
3
5

input and output, the isotopic mass balance of a

lake can be described with the following equation:

solve for the ratio of water losses by outflow relative to evaporation:

dVlake/dt = Qrainrain + Qinflowsinflows

Qoutflowlake Qevapevap

Qrainrain + QKazingaKazinga + Qother inflowsother inflows =

QSemlikilake + (1 QSemliki)evap.
(6)

(4)

where V is the volume of the lake, dt is the time period of interest, Q represents hydrologic fluxes,
represents the isotopic composition of a given variable, and the isotopic composition of a lakes outflow is assumed to be identical to that of the lake
water. Applying this equation to Lake Edward, and
assuming steady state conditions (current dV/dt
equals zero), this equation can be expressed as:
Qrainrain + QKazingaKazinga + Qother inflowsother inflows =
(5)
QSemlikilake + Qevapevap.

Assuming that the inflow fluxes are relatively well

constrained, this equation can be rearranged to

The isotopic composition of Lake Edward was measured in 1996, 2001, and 2002, and displays little
variation, with an average of 4.3 for 18O and 30
for D (Table 7). Wet and dry season measurements of Lake George in 2002 and 2003 also show
little variation, while the Kazinga Channel varied
slightly and averaged about 0.5 for 18O and 10
for D. River samples include wet and dry season measurements in 2002 and 2003 from all the
major tributaries from the eastern side of Lake Edward, several rivers draining the Ruwenzoris, and
springwater samples from near the eastern border
fault. Together, these samples cover 65% of Lake
Edwards catchment area, and average 2.2 for
18O and 2.8 for D. It should be noted that

86

Russell and Johnson

FIG. 4. D vs. 18O for rivers, springs, and lakes

sampled within the Lake Edward catchment.

this average does not include the Kazinga Channel,

which is strongly affected by evaporation of waters
impounded within Lake George.
The isotopic composition of rainfall in the region
is poorly constrained. Four rainfall measurements
taken in the Lake Edward basin in 20012003 average 0.4 for 18O and 17.25 for D but exhibit considerable scatter. The nearest rainfall
station to Lake Edward, at Entebbe, Uganda, has a
mean weighted composition of 2.91 for 18O
and 11.2 for D (Rozanski et al. 1996), but is
likely influenced by water evaporated from Lake
Victoria. Moreover, evapotranspired moisture
within the Congo River basin may bring isotopically heavy rainfall from the west into the Edward
region (Rozanski et al. 1993), thereby further distancing the isotopic composition of rainfall near
Lake Edward from Entebbe.
Lake Edward, Lake George, river, and spring
samples are plotted in 18O vs. D space together
with the global meteoric water line (GMWL, D =
8 * 18O + 10) of Craig (1961) and the African meteoric water line (AMWL, D = 7.4 * 18O + 10.1)
(Fig. 4). The latter was adopted by Cohen et al.
(1997), who showed that stations in the interior of
East and Central Africa define a D vs. 18O trend
that differs from the GMWL due to the extreme
continentality of rainfall in interior Africa. The validity of the AMWL for Lake Edward is confirmed
by the fact that rivers from the Edward basin plot
on or closer to the AMWL than the GMWL (Fig.
4). Following the reasoning of Craig (1961), the intersection of the line linking Lake Edward to in-

flowing rivers yields the mean isotopic composition

of Lake Edwards source waters. Solution of these
equations gives 0.91 for 18O and 3.36 for
D.
These values are somewhat heavier than the average values of rivers draining the northern and eastern catchments of Lake Edward. Moreover, if we
assume that the mean isotopic composition of rivers
sampled within the Edward basin equals that of
rainfall, we can estimate the weighted isotopic composition of inputs to Lake Edward (the Kazinga
Channel, river inputs, and rainfall) to be 1.56
for 18O and 0.1 for D. The assumption that the
isotopic composition of rivers is not strongly altered by evaporation, and therefore can be used to
estimate the composition of rainfall, is supported by
the position of those rivers on or near the AMWL
and GMWL in Figure 4. Were the rivers strongly
affected by evaporation, we would expect them to
plot off the meteoric water lines along the regional
evaporative trend defined by Lake Edward (Craig
1961). The differences between these compositional
estimates of the source waters for Lake Edward
suggest an unmeasured heavy isotopic source-water
to Lake Edward, likely related to moisture from the
Congo basin from the unsampled catchments to the
south and west of Lake Edward (Rozanski et al.
1993). At present there is no objective method for
determining the precise isotopic composition of
source waters to Lake Edward, so we assume this
composition is intermediate between our weighted
composition and the composition calculated using
the AMWL: 1.24 for 18O and 1.73 for D.
We note that this estimate is conservative in that it
is isotopically heavy relative to our measured values. Isotopically lighter input values will result in
higher estimates of the importance of evaporation,
calculated below.
The isotopic composition of evaporated water
vapor from Lake Edward, evap, has not been measured. However, it can be calculated using the following equation from Benson and White (1994)
that describes the isotopic equilibration of lake-derived evaporated water with regional humidity
across a turbulent mixed layer:
evap/1000 = {[(Rlake/ev) hfRair] /
[((1 h)/k) + h(1 f)]} 1

(7)

where R lake = 1 + lake/1000 and R air = 1 + air/

1000. In this equation, ev is the equilibrium enrichment factor that depends on lake temperature (ev =

The Hydrology of Lake Edward, Uganda

FIG. 5. Isotopic simulations of water loss by

evaporation as a function of f (fraction of
advected moisture over the lake) calculated for D
and 18O. Error bars represent the range of variation when the net source composition is allowed to
vary between the values calculated by mean
weighting of hydrologic inputs and by the intersection of the AMWL with the evaporative trend
defined by Lake Edward.
exp(1137TL2 0.4156TL1 2.0667 103, Majoube 1971), h is relative humidity of the region, f
is the fraction of humidity that has been advected
into the basin, air is the isotopic composition of
moisture advected into the basin, and k is the kinetic fractionation factor that depends on wind
speed and equals 0.994 for wind speeds less than
6.8 m/s (Merlivat and Jouzel 1979). We used an average relative humidity of 74%, and the annual average lake temperature data of Verbeke (1957) for
Lake Edward to calculate ev (Table 4). air is assumed to be in isotopic equilibrium with regional
rainfall at surface air temperatures, and regional
rainfall is assumed to have the same average isotopic composition as rivers in the region (Friedman
et al. 1962, Benson and White 1994).
The calculation of evap is very sensitive to combinations of f and h (Benson and White 1994). Decreasing humidity causes isotopically lighter values
of evap due to faster exchange across the mixed
layer near the lake surface. The value of f for Lake
Edward is unknown, and will depend on factors
such as regional climate, humidity, and winds as
well as basin morphology. f can vary between 0 and
1, but is likely low in large lakes such as Lake Edward (e.g., Ricketts and Johnson 1996, Benson and
White 1994). By substituting equation 6 into equation 5 and varying f, we can calculate a range of

87

possible values for the percentage of the water income to Lake Edward lost by evaporation (Fig. 5).
Using the same suite of regional input variables,
humidity and wind speed data from Kasese, and hydrologic and isotope variables from Viner and
Smith (1973) and measured in the present study, we
performed the same calculation for the oxygen isotope balance of Lake George. The latter calculation
allows us to estimate the validity of our results for
Lake Edward, as the hydrological fluxes for Lake
George are reasonably well-known (Viner and
Smith 1973).
Viner and Smith (1973) show that Lake George
loses 21% of its water income by evaporation,
while solution of equations 5 and 6 for Lake
George estimate evaporative losses of 22 to 25% of
water income as f varies from 0 to 0.7. Our estimates are thus remarkably similar to measured values given the uncertainty in our estimates of the
isotopic composition of rainfall in the region. Applying these equations to Lake Edward, calculations
of the percentage of the net water income that is
lost from Lake Edward by evaporation differ for
18O and D by an average of 12%. It seems likely
that this is due to errors in calculating the composition of source water to the lake. Regardless, it is apparent that, at a minimum, evaporation represents
40% of the net water output from Lake Edward.
Unfortunately, the value of f cannot be known with
certainty for Lake Edward. However, at values of f
< 0.4, which seem likely for a lake the size of Edward, and with 18O calculations using values set at
mean variables listed in Table 4, the most likely
evaporative loss is between 50 and 60% of the
water income.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The East African Great Lakes comprise an important economic resource for riparian countries.
Despite their importance, considerable uncertainty
remains with regards to the Great Lakes physical
hydrologies, including that of Lake Edward. Within
the present study, surface runoff, outflow, evaporation, and the isotopic composition of water income
to Lake Edward remain poorly constrained. Moreover, it should be noted that we have averaged hydroclimatic data from the Lake Edward region
across several decades, introducing potential errors
into our estimates that we cannot quantify. Nevertheless, some preliminary conclusions may be
drawn, and we hope that this work will spur future

88

Russell and Johnson

TABLE 8. Our calculated summary water budget

for Lake Edward based upon previous surveys and
stable isotope mass balance calculations.
Direct Precipitation
Kazinga Channel Discharge
Other catchment inputs
Evaporation
Semliki River Outflow
Water Residence Time

2.04 109 m3/yr

1.7 109 m3/yr
4.75 109 m3/yr
4.61 109 m3/yr
3.88 109 m3/yr
20 years

research into the physical hydrology of this important lake.

Our hydrologic estimates for the water budget of
Lake Edward based upon literature review suggests
that evaporation comprises about 54% of the water
losses from Edward (Table 8). This seems reasonable in light of the results of our isotopic analyses
that constrain the ratio of evaporation/total water
losses to between 0.5 and 0.6. Our revised hydrologic estimates for Lake Edward suggest that evaporation is much more important to water losses than
previous researchers have indicated (e.g., Hurst
1927, Lehman 2002). Based upon our analysis, it
appears that previous analysts may have overestimated the magnitude of river inputs to Lake Edward and thereby annual discharge from the
Semliki River. Indeed, comparing the hydrologic
estimate of this study to Lehman (2002) highlights
the importance of obtaining accurate runoff estimate from the Lake Edward basin: The higher surface runoff values used by Lehman (2002) yield
85% higher water inputs to the lake than the present
study.
Our results have important implications for the
modern-day chemistry of Lake Edward, and the potential for developing paleohydrologic records from
Lake Edward. Lake Edward waters are slightly
brackish (0.7 ppt TDS) with a chemistry dominated
by Na+, Mg2+, K+, and HCO3-. Kilham and Hecky
(1973) attributed this chemistry to the influence of
the alkaline, ultramafic rocks of the Virunga volcanoes. Unfortunately, there are almost no chemical
data from the rivers draining the Virunga region
into Lake Edward, severely limiting our ability to
develop hydrochemical mass balance models of
Lake Edward. Lehman (2002) produced the first
chemical model for Lake Edward, and balanced the
lakes bicarbonate budget using Hursts (1927)
measurement of the alkalinity of the Ruchuru River
of 17.2 meq. This alkalinity is more than twice that
of Lake Edwards; however, Hurst (1927) also

states that reagents for measuring chemical analyses

were made from local natural waters, potentially
corrupting the alkalinity data.
Marlier (1951) measured the conductivity of the
Ruchuru River at 408.7 S/cm, a value much too
small to allow an alkalinity of 17.2 meq/l. Other
rivers and lakes in the region with conductivities
ranging from 300600 S/cm have alkalinities between 2.1 and 6.8 meq/l, while Lake Edward has a
conductivity of ~880 S/cm and an alkalinity of ~9
meq/l (e.g., Damas 1954, Talling and Talling 1965).
In sum, our hydrologic estimates imply that Lake
Edwards salinity is significantly concentrated relative to its inputs; we estimate a concentration factor
of ~2 for conservative solutes. Furthermore, our estimates imply that Lake Edwards salinity and
chemistry should be particularly sensitive to
changes in the hydrologic balance and concomitant
changes in salinity concentration factors, particularly changes in rainfall as suggested by Lehman
(2002).
Considerable ambiguities about the hydrology of
Lake Edward remain and will not be resolved without additional measurements of the lakes physical
properties. While some of these, such as rainfall,
lake temperature, and cloudiness, may be most effectively monitored using remote sensing techniques (e.g., Lehman 2002), others, such as surface
runoff and evaporation, will require additional field
measurements using river gauges and lake-based
meteorological buoys. Both Lehman (2002) and
this study highlight cloudiness, humidity, diurnal
temperature, and unmeasured runoff from the
southern rivers as key variables needed to clarify
our understanding of Lake Edward. These variables
remain unmeasured, and must be quantified to further our knowledge of both the modern and paleolimnology of this Great Lake.
CONCLUSIONS
Calculations based on stable isotopic and hydrometeorological data provide similar estimates
for Lake Edwards water budget. These data indicate that Lake Edward loses between 50 and 60% of
its water income by evaporation from the lake surface. Hydrologic inputs to the lake are dominated
by river inputs from the catchment. Thus, although
Lake Edward loses significantly more of its water
income to outflow than other East African Rift
lakes, the large evaporative flux from Lake Edward
should make the lakes water level and chemistry
highly sensitive to hydroclimatic variations.

The Hydrology of Lake Edward, Uganda

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We wish to thank the Government of Uganda,
and in particular the Ugandan National Council of
Science and Technology and Ugandan Wildlife Authority for permission to conduct field work. Dirk
Verschuren, Hilde Eggermont, Kristina R. M. Beuning, and the International Decade for East African
Lakes program are also acknowledged for assistance with field work. Sharon Nicholson and John
T. Lehman provided very helpful reviews of an earlier version of this manuscript. This research was
supported by NSF Earth System History program
grant # 0314832. Any opinions, findings and conclusions expressed in this material are those of the
authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of
the National Science Foundation.
REFERENCES
Beadle L.C. 1966. Prolonged stratification and deoxygenation in tropical lakes I. Crater Lake Nkugute,
Uganda, compared with Lakes Bunyoni and Edward.
Limnol. Oceanogr. 2:152163.
. 1981. The Inland Waters of Tropical Africa: An
Introduction to Tropical Limnology. London: Longman.
Benson L.V., and White J.W.C. 1994. Stable isotopes of
oxygen and hydrogen in the Truckee River-Pyramid
Lake surface-water system. Limnol. Oceanogr. 39:
19451958.
Cohen, A.S., Talbot, M.R., Awramik, S.M., Dettman
D.L., and Abell, P. 1997. Lake level and paleoenvironmental history of Lake Tanganyika, Africa, as
inferred from late Holocene and modern stromatolites.
GSA Bulletin 109:444460.
Craig H. 1961. Isotopic variations in meteoric waters.
Science 133:17021703.
Damas, Z.H. 1937. Recherches dans les Lacs Kivu,
douard, et Ndalaga. Exploration du Parc National
Albert. Mission H. Damas (19351936). Institut
Royal Colonial Belge, Brussels, Belgium II (1).
, 1954. tude limnologique de quelques lacs
rundais, I le cadregographique. Institut Royal Colonial Belge, Mmoires Collection Tome XXIV, fasc. 2.
Brussels, Belgium.
Friedman, I., Machta L., and Soller, R. 1962. Watervapor exchange between a water droplet and its environment. J. Geophys. Res. 67:27612766.
Gat, J.R. 1995. Stable isotopes of fresh and saline lakes.
In Physics and Chemistry of Lakes, 2 nd Ed., pp.
139162. A. Lerman, D. Imboden, and J.R. Gat (eds.),
Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Hecky, R.E., and Degens, E.T. 1973. Late PleistonceneHolocene chemical stratigraphy and paleolimnology
of the Rift Valley Lakes of central Africa. Woods Hole

89

Oceanographic Institution Technical Report 73,

Woods Hole, MA.
Hulme M. 1998. Global precipitation dataset, http://
www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~mikeh/datasets/global
Hurst, H.E. 1925. The lake plateau basin of the Nile.
Egypt Ministry of Public Works, Physical Department
Paper No. 2.
. 1927. The lake plateau basin of the Nile. Egypt
Ministry of Public Works, Physical Department Paper
No. 23.
Hydromet. 1982. Hydrometerological survey of the
catchments of Lakes Victoria, Kyoga, and Mobutu
Sese Seko. Project findings and Recommendations.
World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and
United Nations Development Program (UNDP),
Geneva. Report no. RAF/73/001.
Jensen, M.E. 1974. Consumptive use of water and irrigation water requirements: a report. The American
Society for Civil Engineers Technical Committee on
Irrigation Water, New York.
Kilham, P., and Hecky, R.E. 1973. Fluoride: geochemical and ecological significance in East African waters
and sediments. Limnol. Oceanogr. 18:932945.
Laerdal, T. 2000. Lakes Edward, George, and Victoria
(Uganda): A study of late Quaternary rift tectonics,
sedimentation, and paleoclimate. PhD thesis, University of Bergen.
, Talbot, M.R., and Russell, J.M. 2002. Late Quaternary sedimentation and climate in the Lakes
Edward and George area, Uganda-Congo. In The East
African Great Lakes: Limnology, Paleolimnology,
Biodiversity, Eds. EO Odada and D. Olago, pp.
429470. Kluwer. Adademic Publishers, Dordrecht,
The Netherlands.
Lehman, J. 2002. Application of AVHRR to water balance, mixing dynamics, and water chemistry of Lake
Edward, East Africa. In The East African Great
Lakes: Limnology, Paleolimnology, Biodiversity,
Eds. EO Odada and D. Olago, pp. 236260. Kluwer.
Adademic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Majoube, M. 1971. Fractionnement en oxygene-18 et en
deuterium entre leau et sa vapor. J. Chem. Phys. 197:
14231436.
Marlier, G. 1951. Recherches hydrobiologiques dans les
rivires due Congo Oriental. Composition des eaux.
La conductibilit lectrique. Hydrobiologia 3:
217227.
Merlivat, L., and Jouzel, J. 1979. Global climatic interpretation of the deuterium-oxygen 18 relationship for
precipitation. J. Geophys. Res. 84:50295033.
Nicholson, S.E. 1996. A review of climate dynamics and
climate variability in Eastern Africa. In The Limnology, climatology, and paleoclimatology of the East
African Lakes. Eds. T.C. Johnson and E.O. Odada, pp.
2556. Gordon and Breach Publishers, Newark, NJ.

90

Russell and Johnson

Penman, H.L. 1948. Natural evaporation from open

water, soil, and grass. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A 76372383.
Ricketts, R.D., and Johnson, T.C. 1996. Climate change
in the Turkana basin as deduced from a 4,000 year
long 18O record. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 142:717.
Rozanski, K., Aragus-Aragus, L., and Gonfiantini, R.
1993. Isotope patters in modern global precipitation.
In Climate Change in Continental Isotopic Records.
P.K. Swart, K.C. Lohmann, J. McKenzie, and S.
Savin (eds.), pp. 136. American Geophysical Union
Monograph 78, Berkeley, CA.
, Aragus-Aragus, L., and Gonfiantini, R. 1996.
Isotope patterns of precipitation in the East African
region. In The Limnology, climatology, and paleoclimatology of the East African Lakes, Eds. T.C. Johnson, and E.O. Odada,, pp. 7994. Gordon and Breach
Publishers, Newark, NJ.
Russell, J.M., Johnson, T.C., Kelts, K.R., Laerdal, T.,
and Talbot, M.R. 2003. An 11,000-year liithostratigraphic and paleohydrologic record from equatorial
Africa: Lake Edward, Uganda-Congo. Palaeogeograhy Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology 193:
2549.
Said, R. 1993. The River Nile: Geology, Hydrology, and
Utilization. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Spigel, R.H., and Coulter, G.W. 1996. Comparison of
Hydrology and Physical Limnology of the East
African Great Lakes: Tanganyika, Malawi, Victoria,
Kivu, and Turkana (with reference to some North
American Great Lakes In The Limnology, climatology, and paleoclimatology of the East African Lakes,

Eds. T.C. Johnson and E.O. Odada, pp. 103140. Gordon and Breach Publishers, Newark, NJ.
Talling, J.F., and Talling, I.B. 1965. The chemical composition of African lake waters. Internationale Revue
gesamten Hydrobiologie 50:421463.
Turner, B.F., Gardner, L.R., and Sharp, W.E. 1996. The
hydrology of Lake Bosumtwi, a climate-sensitive lake
in Ghana, West Africa. J. Hydrol. 183:243261.
Verbeke, J. 1957. Recherches cologiques sur la faune
des grands lacs de lest du Congo Belge. Resultats
scientifiques de lexploration hydrobiologique
(19521954) des lacs Kivu, Edouard et Albert. Institut
Royal Colonial Belge, Brussels, Belgium 3 (1).
Viner, A.B. and Smith, I.B. 1973. Geographical, historical, and physical aspects of Lake George. Proc. Royal
Society of London Series B 184:235270.
Winter, T.C., Rosenberry, D.O., and Sturrock, A.M.
1995. Evaluation of 11 equations for determining
evaporation for a small lake in the north central
United States. Wat. Res. Res. 31:983993.
Worthington, E.B. 1932. A report on the fisheries of
Uganda Investigated by the Cambridge Expedition to
the East African lakes, 193031. Part I. Lakes
Edward and George and the Kazinga Channel. Zoological Laboratory, Cambridge, June 1932.
Yin, X., and Nicholson, S.E. 1998. The water balance of
Lake Victoria. Journal of Hydrological Sciences
43:789811.
Submitted: 7 March 2005
Accepted: 24 November 2005
Editorial handling: William M. Schertzer